[removed]

Corporations are the ones with the available resources to enact change. Struggling families buying the cheapest available food and goods are not.

You're hitting close to 200g of protein without supplements on a vegan diet? Not calling you a liar but what's your meal plan look like on a daily basis?

[removed]

[removed]

The saddest thing about this is how much of the food produced gets thrown away.

[removed]

So the 80 billion land animals culled every year is not the answer?

Yessss, nothing is more infuriating than tofu being more expensive that meat and in general that plant-based alternatives are more expensive than animal products!

We need to stop the subsidies to animal products now!

I don't suggest that the corn industry, or any other industry already discussed in different threads that has significant concequences to its subsidizing, die, just that we really don't have to spend this much on food security in order to still have a huge advantage in that regard over the rest of the world.

Soy has almost one to one the same bioavailability as meat along with pea protein, oatmeal, peanuts, rice and not far behind chickpeas. Furthermore eating animal based protein correlates with higher rates of cardiovascular disease and mortality rates. Lastly, the amino acids are not hard to hit, studies show that vegans do get all necessary amino acids and further more these amino acids are not hard to get. Most foods contain a bit of all necessary amino acids and rice and beans alone cover the daily recommended intake.

[removed]

[deleted]

[removed]

I was just about to invent the catheterannabis, the cannabis catheter. But I guess not now.

[removed]

Then I guess it's a good job they're constantly coursing through my bloodstream.

[removed]

> The fact that the USA has been subsidizing sugar and corn since nearly the inception of the country is nutty.

I say it's sweet and corny. Corn and corn syrup aren't exactly huge contributors to climate change, and America values its food security. There are worse things to spend tax dollars on.

There is an extensive catalogue of services covered by fake interaction resale panels. You can buy any form of interaction from any global or local service,” says one of the study’s authors, Juan Tapiador, a professor in UC3M’s Computer Science Department. Another conclusion reached by the researchers is the level of “customisation” of these services. For example, for many interactions (playing music, watching videos or “likes” on social media) you can choose the geographical origin of the account that will do so and the gender (male or female). “A third interesting finding is the disparity in prices between providers of the same service, which suggests that this is still a developing market where the market value of this service is unknown”, adds Juan Tapiador.

According to the study’s results, the cheapest rates include buying direct traffic to a website, getting “likes” on Instagram or getting views on multimedia platforms. For example, 1000 “likes” on Instagram cost 1.3 euros, while 2 euros can get 1000 views on YouTube or 1000 plays on Spotify. Interestingly, several services are offered for free so customers can check their quality and thus be convinced to invest in different ones. This way, for less than 9 cents you can get 1000 views on TikTok, SoundCloud or Instagram/IGTV. Buying Instagram followers is more expensive: for 4.3 euros you can get 1000. And then there are other more expensive services because they involve some personalisation, such as reviews on Google or TripAdvisor, which range at around 1 euro per text.

As Narseo Vallina-Rodríguez, associate research lecturer at IMDEA Networks and another of the work’s authors, says, “potential consumers of this type of service can be anyone depending on the type of review: from influencers who want to promote their channels on social media to brands trying to promote the visibility of their products”.

This study, recently published in the scientific journal Computers & Security, is part of a wider research project on the ecosystem of services that provide fake activity and identity services on the internet. The aim of this research is to quantify and analyse the evolution of the global market price of services that (re)sell artificial interactions on social media and content distribution platforms, something that has rarely been studied in academic literature, according to the researchers.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167404822004059?via%3Dihub

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[removed]

You’re right. I misunderstood my first source.

> After the creation of a special cavalry unit, the peoples of the ancient Near East and China made some innovations to the equine equipment in order to control their horses during fighting. The “martingale” collar was probably an innovation of the Near East, and stirrups were invented in ancient China.

On my first read, that sounded to me like these happened concurrently. Upon closer reading, the paper actually indicates China had cavalry 600 or more years before the stirrup. Thank you!

But vegan protein is only halve as bioavailable as meat protein so you need to eat double. Also you need to hit all aminoacids

[removed]